Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string
 transformations to inputs
Date: Sun, 4 May 2025 19:41:54 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <vv91gj$35pgh$2@dont-email.me>
References: <TuuNP.2706011$nb1.2053729@fx01.ams4>
 <87cyd5182l.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vu6lnf$39fls$2@dont-email.me>
 <vugddv$b21g$2@dont-email.me> <vui4uf$20dpc$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuivtb$2lf64$3@dont-email.me> <vungtl$2v2kr$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuoaac$3jn5n$5@dont-email.me> <vuq81v$1hjka$1@dont-email.me>
 <vutefq$gmbi$3@dont-email.me> <vv22hs$puqs$1@dont-email.me>
 <vv89ll$2erlq$4@dont-email.me> <vv8en2$2kjgk$3@dont-email.me>
 <vv8ot8$2ub3p$1@dont-email.me> <2RRRP.199920$wBVe.186661@fx06.ams4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 02:41:56 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0a6320ec149f030cd98ca15e4d2d5e5f";
	logging-data="3335697"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+WzlUv8zdCDagpMJ2hOimS"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:zPjbZ7/3Mj/IqJS+274OnpkB6+c=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250504-4, 5/4/2025), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <2RRRP.199920$wBVe.186661@fx06.ams4>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean

On 5/4/2025 5:27 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Sun, 04 May 2025 17:15:04 -0500, olcott wrote:
> 
>> On 5/4/2025 2:21 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 04/05/2025 18:55, olcott wrote:
>>>> Changing my words then rebutting these changed words is dishonest.
>>>>
>>>> Functions computed by Turing Machines require INPUTS and produce
>>>> OUTPUTS DERIVED FROM THESE INPUTS.
>>>
>>> Counter-example: a Turing Machine can calculate pi without any input
>>> whatsoever.
>>>
>>> As Mikko rightly said: a Turing machine does not need to require an
>>> input.
>>>
>>>
>> IT IS NOT COMPUTING FUNCTION THEN IT IS NOT COMPUTING FUNCTION THEN IT
>> IS NOT COMPUTING FUNCTION THEN IT IS NOT COMPUTING FUNCTION THEN
>>
>> Computable functions are the basic objects of study in computability
>> theory. Computable functions are the formalized analogue of the
>> intuitive notion of algorithms, in the sense that a function is
>> computable if there exists an algorithm that can do the job of the
>> function, i.e. given an input of the function domain it can return the
>> corresponding output. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_function
>>
>> given an input of the function domain it can return the corresponding
>> output.
>>
>> given an input of the function domain it can return the corresponding
>> output.
>>
>> given an input of the function domain it can return the corresponding
>> output.
>>
>> *Computer science is ONLY concerned with computable functions*
> 
> Computer science is also concerned with intractable problems.
> 
> /Flibble

I think the computability aspect of computer science
is only concerned with computable functions.

Computing the mapping from INPUTS to OUTPUTS on
the basis of finite string transformation rules
specified by an algorithm.

The assembly language version of DD is the same
sort of state transition directed graph as the
Linz proof, thus zero vagueness or ambiguity.

DD correctly emulated by HHH CANNOT POSSIBLY
REACH ITS OWN FINAL STATE. Many dozens of
people have been STUPIDLY disagreeing with this
for several years.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer